Compensation and Benefits Study for Springfield Public Schools - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Compensation and Benefits Study for Springfield Public Schools

June 25, 2019

Presentation of Report

1

• Study Process/Goals
• Outreach Summary
• Assessment of Current Conditions
• Market and Benefit Surveys
• Recommendations
• Questions

Agenda

2

Study Process

• Study Initiation and Data Collection
• Outreach and Orientation Sessions – Chapter 2
• Analysis of Current Conditions – Chapter 3
• Market Salary and Benefits Surveys – Chapters 4 and 5
• Job Assessment Tool (JAT) and Classification Scoring – Chapter 6
• Recommendations – Chapter 6

3

Study Goals

• Review internal and external (market analysis) equity structure

by which classified and certificated employees are compensated.

• Conduct a Benefits Study of offerings of Springfield Public

Schools as compared to market.

• Provide recommendations and cost analysis of any necessary

improvements to Springfield Public Schools compensation, classification, and benefits plan.

4

Study Initiation and Outreach

• Study Initiation – August 2018
• Four Orientation Sessions – Week of September 18, 2018 –

110 employees attended

• Video link for those employees who could not attend
• rientation sessions
• 44 Focus Groups conducted with 370 Employees

5

Study Initiation and Outreach

• Job Assessment Tool (JAT) – September 21 – October 19, 2018

Supervisor’s and HR Review – October – February 2019

• 1,918 Employee Completions (58%)
• 1,554 Supervisor Completions (44%)
• 27 Management Issue Tools (MITs)

6

Outreach Summary

• Employees enjoy the working environment in Springfield Public

Schools, share genuine passion and appreciation for working with students, enjoy camaraderie with co‐workers, and have the support of supervisors.

• Many employees expressed concerns that the current

compensation structure pays them less than in peer school districts.

• Several employees provided examples of internal equity,

compression issues, and concern with the lack of promotional

• pportunities.
• Employees shared various issues with classifications and position

titles.

7

Assessment of Current Conditions

• 6 salary tables included in the study:
• 321 unique job titles
• 3,506 employees (3,078 full‐time and 428 part‐time).
• Summary Analysis:
• Range Spreadgenerally set between 50 to 70 percent for

best practiceaverages 51.2 percent in the Secretarial/Clerical salary schedule, 45.5 percent in the ESP salary schedule, 36.1 percent in the Non‐union salary schedule, 33.4 percent in the Nurses salary schedule, 48.1 percent in the Teachers salary schedule, and 43.4 percent in the Transportation salary schedule.

8

Assessment of Current Conditions

• Midpoint Progressiongenerally set between 3 to 5 percent for

best practiceaverages 6.3 percent in the Secretarial/Clerical salary schedule, 7.5 percent in the ESP salary schedule, 3.8 percent in the Non‐union salary schedule, 13.9 in the Nurses salary schedule, 10.4 percent in the Teachers salary schedule, and 12.1 percent in the Transportation salary schedule.

• Salary Placementthe majority of employees in the Secretarial/

Clerical and ESP salary schedules are compensated above their pay grade’s midpoint, whereas employees in the Non‐union, Nurses, Teachers, and Transportation salary schedules are fairly evenly distributed around their pay grade’s midpoint.

• Grade Penetrationthe District generally maintains a healthy

positive linear relationship between experience and grade penetration throughout each pay range.

9

Job Assessment Tool

• Provided Data on Roles and Responsibilities by Classification
• All Employees Asked to Complete
• Produced Classification Scores Based on 5 Factors:
• Leadership
• Working Conditions
• Complexity
• Decision Making
• Relationships
• Multiple Verification Steps: Employee Input, Supervisor Review,

Review by Evergreen, Review by Human Resources Office Staff

• Combined with Market Survey Data, allowed for Calculation of

Predicted Market Values and Updating of Job Descriptions

10

Market Survey

• 12 Market Peers and ERI data for private sector (Economic

Research Institute data)

• 221 Market Matches Made
• Evergreen found that overall District salary ranges are:
• Non‐Exempt Positions:

 SPS is approximately 1.6 percent below the market minimum, 5.8 percent below the market midpoint, and 8.7 percent below the market maximum of salary ranges of benchmark positions.  The average market range spread across the salary ranges of all surveyed non‐exempt positions is 51.6 percent, which is broader than the 41.5 percent among non‐exempt benchmarked classifications.

11

Market Survey (Cont’d)

• Exempt Positions:

 The average market range spread across the salary ranges of all surveyed exempt positions is 37.4 percent, which is slightly narrower than the 39.8 percent among exempt benchmarked classifications.  SPS is approximately 5.9 percent above the market minimum, 6.9 percent above the market midpoint, and 7.6 percent above the market maximum of salary ranges

• f benchmark positions.
• Stipends:

 SPS offers similar stipends and supplements compared to the market for common programs. SPS appears to

• ffer many additional supplements due to the size and

complexity of the District.

12

Benefits Survey

• Overall, SPS was found to be at or above the market in terms
• f benefits provided.
• When single benefits were analyzed in isolation, many of the

District's offerings appeared more generous than those

• ffered by peers.
• Health insurance premiums paid by SPS are higher than

peers and employee out of pocket premiums are lower than peers, and as compared to other peer districts, the annual deductible for individual/family coverage is lower for SPS employees.

13

Recommendations

• Eleven (11) Recommendations to Address Compensation and

Classification Findings

• Cost Implementation Options Provided
• Recommendations Designed to Bring Springfield Public

Schools to Market

14

Recommendations (Cont’d)

RECOMMENDATION 1: Adopt the proposed new salary schedules to strengthen the SPS salary structure. RECOMMENDATION 2: Adopt the new classification titles proposed by Evergreen, and place appropriate employees into appropriate classifications. RECOMMENDATION 3: Adopt the implementation option that is most appropriate for Springfield Public Schools.

15

Implementation Options

16

Op Option tion De Defini niti tion To Total l Im Impl plement entati tion

• n

Co Cost # Emplo # Employees ees Rece ceiving iving Ad Adjustments Av Avg Sa g Sala lary Adju ry Adjustmen stment for Emplo for Employees wh ees who

• receiv

ceive a e an Adju Adjustmen stment Avg Avg Perce Percentage tage Ad Adjustment Bring E ing Empl ployee ee Sal Salari ries t to N New Mini Minimum mum This approach brings employee base salaries to the newly proposed minimum, if their existing salary falls below their newly assigned pay grade’s minimum. If the employee's salary is above the minimum, the salary remains unchanged and will not not eq equa uate te to to a a st step in t ep in the curre current t pay pay sc scal ale. e. $202,061.19 146 $1,383.98 8.1% Bring t ing to Next xt Hi High ghest S est Step ep in in New Pla New Plan This approach brings all employees' base salaries to the next highest/ closest step in the newly proposed pay plan. For example, if an employee is placed in the new Pay Grade XX50, but their current salary is $35,000, they will be moved to Step E in the new pay plan, which hypothetically equates to a salary of $35,114.63. Salary increases, therefore will always be less than a full step increase, as the intent of this

• ption is to simply place the employees on a step in the new
• plan. Inc

Includ udes Bring to Minim ing to Minimum Cost sts. s. $665,542.43 1077 $617.96 2.3% Cu Current R t Range e Pe Penet netrat atio ion n This approach applies each employee’s current pay range penetration percentage to their newly assigned pay grade. That is, if an employee is currently 40 percent into their current pay grade’s range, they are placed 40 percent into their newly assigned pay grade’s range. Incl Includ udes B es Bring ing t to Mi Minimu mum C m Costs sts. $2,802,036.92 1034 $2,709.90 2.9% C Current rrent Ra Range nge Pene Penetrat tration - ion - Cappe pped a d at Midpoint Midpoint This approach applies each employee’s current pay range penetration percentage to their newly assigned pay grade. That is, if an employee is currently 40 percent into their current pay grade’s range, they are placed 40 percent into their newly assigned pay grade’s range. If, however, the employee is currently more than 50 percent above their current pay grade’s range, they are placed at either their current salary or the midpoint of their newly assigned pay grade’s range, whichever is greater. Inc Includ udes B es Bring t ng to Mi Minimu mum C m Costs sts. $1,533,645.40 790 $1,941.32 8.5% Hire Da Date te Pari rity ty This approach places employees into their newly assigned pay grade based on their total years of experience with SPS compared to the length of a typical career. In this model, an employee with 15 years of experience in their current classification is expected to be 50 percent into their pay grade range (i.e. midpoint) based on a 30 year career (15 years/30 years = 50). Employees whose salaries are already at or above this expected amount are unchanged, but employees whose current salaries fall below this expected amount are brought up to this level. Inclu cludes B es Brin ing to g to Mi Minimu mum C m Costs sts. $796,678.16 649 $1,227.55 5.8% Clas ass D s Date te Par Parity ty This approach places employees into their newly assigned pay grade based on their years of experience in that classification compared to the length of a typical career. In this model, an employee with 15 years of experience in their current classification is expected to be 50 percent into their pay grade range (i.e. midpoint) based on a 30 year career (15 years/30 years = 50). Employees whose salaries are already at or above this expected amount are unchanged, but employees whose current salaries fall below this expected amount are brought up to this level. Inc Includ udes B es Bring ng to Min

• Minimu

mum C m Costs. $471,904.71 409 $1,153.80 0.8%

17

Recommendations (Cont’d)

RECOMMENDATION 4: Simplify and consolidate the Miscellaneous Rates of Pay to include the rates for part-time or non- contract positions as well as the rates for extra duties. RECOMMENDATION 5: Consider whether it is appropriate to change the position of Parent Educator to an hourly-waged, non- exempt position once the Department of Labor (DOL) rule change becomes effective. RECOMMENDATION 6: Adopt a formula-driven approach for both academic and athletic stipends and, to the extent possible, set the stipends at a fixed dollar amount rather than a percent of current salary.

18

Recommendations (Cont’d)

RECOMMENDATION 7: Eliminate unnecessary stipends and supplements, and establish clear expectations and guidelines for evaluating whether an activity is eligible for a stipend in the future. RECOMMENDATION 8: Require Department Heads or members of the Leadership Team to develop detailed and consistent expectations for each stipend duty, and pay no stipends where such descriptions and expectations are not in place. RECOMMENDATION 9: Adopt the Job Assessment Tool (JAT) and market data-based methodology from Evergreen to evaluate new and updated position titles.

19

Recommendations (Cont’d)

RECOMMENDATION 10: Conduct small-scale salary surveys as needed to assess the market competitiveness of hard-to-fill classifications or classifications with retention issues, and make adjustments to pay grade assignments if necessary. RECOMMENDATION 11: Conduct a comprehensive classification and compensation study every five years.

20

• Implementation of the new structure will:
• improve the internal equity of positions and the ability

to compete for and retain dedicated, valued employees;

• compensate employees taking into consideration

internal and external equity;

• allow for flexibility in its administration; and
• provide ample room for salary growth within the

ranges.

Conclusion

21

Thank you!

• Dr. Linda Recio, President

Evergreen Solutions, LLC

2878 Remington Green Circle Tallahassee, Florida 32308 850.383.0111 www.ConsultEvergreen.com

Questions